Druggists refuse to give out pill

USA Today, via Yahoo ^ | Charisse Jones, USA TODAY

[jwalsh07]

Whatever. This assclown is a pharmacist, NOT a Dr.

Assclowns abound. There is no difference between a doctor and a pharmacist in this country. Both are subject to the laws of their respective states and the Constitution. That Constitution guarantees the right to freely exercise religion. If a pharmacist or a doctor has beliefs that inhibit them from destroying human life, then they are free to exercise their rights and not do that.

Their employers are free to fire them if state law allows them to do so.

And birth control pills don't "kill unborn babies" - they prevent conception of babies

Half the story, BCP's are also abortofacients so yes they can and do "kill unborn babies".

... that yours and my tax dollars would eventually pay for the raising of.

Piss poor excuse to kill unborn babies. When fathers and mothers create life they have a duty until the age of majority to provide for that life.

[Diamond]

I not so sure I buy into the details of this story. There is just something fishy about it.

I wonder if this the same Charisse Jones:

Shifting is the story of Black women.

Through the centuries, to cope with racial and gender discrimination, African American women have at times altered their speech, appearance, and behavior. They have shifted emotionally as they struggled to feel good about themselves in a hostile world. And often, in myriad ways, they have fought back. We, Charisse Jones and Kumea Shorter-Gooden, have attempted to shine a light on the double lives of Black women in America. Our African American Women's Voices Project gathered the stories of 400 women from all walks of life and every corner of the country who spoke about their triumphs and challenges on the job, raising Black children, in romantic relationships and in recognizing their own beauty. Their voices provide powerful and poignant insights into the psychology of Black women. We believe Shifting is a valuable tool for all Black women and for anyone who cares about them or the state of race and gender relations in our society.

Do you ever feel that you are working overtime to put others at ease? Or that you have to leave your true self at the door in order to placate White colleagues? Do you downplay your abilities or strengths for fear of outshining Black men? Do you speak one way at the office, another way to your girlfriends? Is it sometimes a struggle to feel good about your looks? Are you constantly battling stereotypes?

Based on the African American Women's Voices Project, Shifting reveals that a large number of African American women feel pressure to compromise their true selves as they navigate America's racial and gender bigotry. Black women "shift." They change the expectations they have for themselves. Or they alter their outer appearance. They modify their speech. They shift 'white' as they head to work in the morning and 'black' as they come back home each night. They shift inward, internalizing the searing pain of the negative stereotypes that they encounter daily. And sometimes they shift by fighting back.

[EggsAckley]

He can take a moral stand all he wants. But he CANNOT confiscate another's property, which the prescription is.

[babyface00]

"And birth control pills don't "kill unborn babies" - they prevent conception of babies..."

Actually, this is not entirely true, if my understanding is correct. While the primary purpose of contraception is to prevent fertilization, there are secondary mechanisms that come into effect if the egg does become fertilized. These secondary mechanisms prevent the fertilized egg (blastocyst, is the correct term, I believe) from implanting into the uterus.

While this might not be the "goal", contraceptives can and do result in what are essentially early-term abortions.

I don't agree with not returning the prescription back to the customer, but I can understand the moral position of a pharmacist in dispensing this type of medication. He/She should have handled this situation better, and disclosed his/her position up front (with the acceptance of his/her employer).

[A.A. Cunningham]

people who are unqualified to have children didn't have children.

Didn't stop the Clintons', Rodhams', Gores', Jacksons', Moores', ad infinitum.

[Phantom Lord]

if "your" pharmacist believes in moral values that do not meet yours, simply go to another - do not FORCE your (immoral to him) values on him.

I do not follow any "Christian Scientist" or other like religious system, I am simply speaking on the CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES.

Please point to me the article in the Constitution that provides an employee the right to not fulfill their job duties that they find objectionable to their moral view.

[Blzbba]

"When fathers and mothers create life they have a duty until the age of majority to provide for that life."


A. Thus using contraception so that people who don't want to create life (for whatever reasons) don't in the first place.


B. That's a real nice sentiment, but is extremely Utopian, in case you haven't noticed the number of single moms.

[k2blader]

Birth control pills?

Now if it had been over abortion pills that'd be a different story.

[Scenic Sounds]

On the one hand, you have the pharmacist's conscience and on the other hand, you have a scrap of paper.

He didn't take the paper from her; she gave it to him. The question for him was whether he could in good conscience give it back. He couldn't, under the circumstances.

[robertpaulsen]

"I quite agree... The pharmacist hasn't the right to impose his/her values..."

But she has the right to impose her values (or lack of them) on him?

That she should be allowed, legally, to force him to perform an act which he considers immoral and against his code of ethics (Hippocratic Oath)?

Freedom is kind of a one-way street with you, isn't it?

[jwalsh07]

Utopia? Is that west of Baghdad?

[freeeee]

When did he acquire the right to make moral judgements for her?

Woah, guys, you're starting to use the same sorts of arguments that pro-abortion people use. Better watch that, now.

There is a distinct difference between the two.

Anti-abortionists claim that abortion is murder and act to protect the right of the fetus. The moral judgement they make is that it is wrong to kill another person.

There are no rights being defended when conception has not yet occurred. The moral judgement being made goes far beyond simple defense of life, and becomes much more far reaching, as it decides whether or not a person can have sex without becoming pregnant.

Rights are defended in the first case. They are violated in the second. Apples and oranges.

[freeeee]

He knew that she was planning to use that prescription to buy pills to prevent a pregnancy.

Tough. The most he can do is refuse to take part. He doesn't own her and cannot make those decisions for her.

[vikk]

So he should confiscate the prescription too? Please point me to the article in the Constitution.

If this guy is the owner, then fine. Do what you want. Put up a sign stating your beliefs and save yourself the drama. If he doesn't own the shop, then he needs to find an employer who'll support his views, because he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

As many have noted already, there are women who take those pills for other issues.

[Scenic Sounds]

He can take a moral stand all he wants. But he CANNOT confiscate another's property, which the prescription is.

Well, you say he cannot, but in doing so you are trying to alter reality because apparently he did.

[mudblood]

"didn't stop x, y or z"

I agree. But it stopped others. It stopped my wife and I when we weren't ready (about 2 years ago) and now we are trying for a first child.

Another thing about the pill is that, even when you aren't trying to prevent pregnancy, it can regulate your periods. This is a fact. A less obvious fact, and arguably just propoganda (I don't know) is that it might help women who don't ever have children have a better chance at avoiding cirvical or ovarian cancer.

[Cathryn Crawford]

But isn't it the moral right of the pharmacist to take away the right of the woman to prevent contraception?

[Sloth]

He didn't take the paper from her; she gave it to him. The question for him was whether he could in good conscience give it back. He couldn't, under the circumstances.

Then he should, in good conscience & without complaint, suffer whatever legal penalties result.

And while he's at it, he should train his conscience not to be so stupid, and stuff.

[EggsAckley]

Yes, he did. And THAT makes him a thief, a common criminal.


Are you a troll, or are you just trying to make FR look like a bunch of lunatics?

[freeeee]

He didn't take the paper from her; she gave it to him.

... in exchange for something.

If you give $20 to the clerk for an item, and he keeps it and you recieve no merchandise, were you stolen from?